Research suggests that liberals have thicker brains than conservatives


The headline on this post is perhaps an oversimplification, and I recognize that it invites snarky remarks from wingnuts about “thick-headed liberals.”

In the final analysis, however, it seems to me that a thicker brain is more desirable than a thin one in the same sense that thicker muscles are more powerful than thin ones.

Anyway, read THIS PIECE.

And before you get too cute with your wisecracks about the brains of liberals, take a gander at this chart from the Pew Research Center, which shows that liberals generally are better educated than conservatives:




  1. The brain is not a muscle maybe you need to take a basic anatomy class. Oops maybe you should send your comments thru an editor before you make yourself look so foolish.

  2. Patients with Canavan’s disease ( an inherited metabolic disorder) have bigger brains, intractable seizueres and mental retardation. Does that sound like a good thing to you?

    On a separate note, as a graduate of the University of Wisconsin, it does not surprise me that college graduates are more likely to self identify as liberal. The politically correct beatdown that happens at most liberal institutions for 4 or 5 years can be hard to resist.

  3. mark: Maybe you should learn how to read.

    I never said the brain is a muscle. Rather, I said “it seems to me that a thicker brain is more desirable than a thin one in the same sense that thicker muscles are more powerful than thin ones.”

    While you’re at it, maybe you should learn correct punctuation as well.

  4. noboma4me

    I have heard the phrase ” Get it through your thick head” many times, and never thought it was a positive attribute!

  5. Pat you try to imply that a thicker brain is a benefit your spin not mine. Typical of a liberal douchebag who has no argument of their stupidity to find grammatical errors.

    Peanut you should be put down it is hard to fathom someone as dumb as you and can remember to breathe.

  6. mark: If you ever again suggest that some other commenter here “should be put down,” all of your semi-literate submissions will be deleted, and you’ll be banned. The same thing will happen if you argue with me about this.

  7. Orlando Clay

    expdoc writes: “The politically correct beatdown that happens at most liberal institutions for 4 or 5 years can be hard to resist.

    “Beatdown” is such a harsh term, Doc. It’s more like “enlightenment.” Students should be exposed to truth before they’re cast into the unrepentant and unforgiving world of conservative lies, myths, fear- and war-mongering, spin, smears, bigotry, disdain for the working class,and other destructive forms of right-wing propaganda. Since your ideology nearly destroyed our country during the Bush era, it’s more important than ever before that the liberal viewpoints be heard by today’s youth.

  8. Orlando: doc is just trying to make excuses for why liberals generally are better educated than conservatives. His implication is that conservatives actually are smarter than liberals because they haven’t had as much indoctrination in those terrible liberal universities..

    But, for some reason, he ignores the stuff in the chart indicating that liberals also tend to make more money than conservatives.

  9. There goes Pat again putting words in my mouth. My implication was……nothing. I only offered an opinion as to why the college educated might more often self report as being liberal. I believe Pat has had previous posts reflecting on the fact that conservatives and liberals tend to group together and live and work with those that are like minded.

    Similarly, those that have undergone a 4 or 5 year liberally slanted education may be more likely to answer questions about politics in that way. I know, as a conservative, I experienced real peer pressure at the UW to nod my head and agree with some of the wacky liberal loonies that were on the faculty. They were none too happy when their liberal fantasies were challenged, to the point that open discussion was actually discouraged.

  10. By the by Pat, your implication seems to be that being “better educated” has some correlation with functional intelligence. I wonder if that’s actually true. I know some pretty smart people with much less education than I have and I know some pretty well educated people that I wouldn’t let babysit for my kids.

  11. John.Wilson

    Am I missing a link to another URL? We have a breakdown of of ideological groups but no sourcing or year it was done.

  12. doc: You say you “know some pretty smart people with much less education than” you have. I guess I would be one of them. I’ve had a little college, but not much, and yet I’m an intellectual guru to countless thousands of my lessers from coast to coast and across the fruited plain.

    But you kids out there should not make too much of my example. You should stay in school, study hard, obey your parents and eat your veggies. Just because I reached the Applesauce pinnacle without having to pay a lot of coin of the realm to academe doesn’t mean everyone can.

  13. John: The source of the data in the chart is a poll conducted a couple of years ago by the Pew Research Center.

  14. Your post 13 makes my point exactly. You are clearly intelligent and if you would not count as having a college degree then it throws cold water all over the theory that college makes you a better person. Apparently it just increases the chance that you will be a self declared liberal.

    As college tuition sky rockets and fewer families see the advantage of spending all that money on a liberal education that may never be adequately paid back, maybe the demographic trend will switch.

    Those liberal college types better figure out a way to bring their costs down, otherwise they will never get the 4 years to try and indoctrinate those minds of mush in the formative years 🙂

  15. I don’t hate higher education. Without it, I wouldn’t be the person I am today. I actually loved my time at UW and not because of it’s party school reputation. My only regret was getting a bachelor of science for the simple reason that it allowed me to meet my premed. requirements most readily.

    In retrospect I should have majored in history or english literature, something more interesting.

    The only problems I have with higher education are the rapidly rising costs and the relative suppression of free exchange of ideas present at some institutions.

  16. doc: I’m amused by your reference to UW as a “party school.”

    No, I don’t doubt that there’s a goodly amount of partying in Madison. But there’s also a goodly amount of partying at most big schools and at lots of smaller ones, too.

    One of the sacred rites of attending college is trafficking in B.S. about how your school has a great reputation as a party school. I heard that stuff when I went to Marquette in Milwaukee 50 years ago. And I’ve heard countless variations on that theme from countless students at countless other schools over the years.

    It usually goes like this: Hey, Playboy magazine rates (insert name of college here) the top party school in the country (or one of the top party schools). Let’s go get drunk!

    At all but the most staid or religious schools, you’re always going to have a certain number of students who celebrate freedom from parental control by partying frequently. Some of them will overdo it and put their lives and careers at risk. Some won’t. And some will hardly party at all.

    And there will always be myths about which institutions are most famous for partying. Nobody will ever ask just how those determinations are made. Nobody will question the methodology behind conferring party-school status on one college more readily than another.

    It’s all part of being young, immature and impressionable.

  17. For Playboy it has to do with selling magazines to those young, immature and impressionable male students. However, Playboy itself was fond of not including Wisconsin in said rankings in the late 80’s and early 90’s simply because it was unfair to group professionals with all the other amatuers.

    For my liberal friends, you would especially enjoy the Mifflin Street block party as it has links going back to the Vietnam protests in the 60’s and 70’s

  18. doc: Do you actually believe that myth about Playboy “not including Wisconsin in said rankings…simply because it was unfair to group professionals with all the other amatuers”?

    I heard that one about Marquette 50 years ago. It’s complete nonsense.

    Read this:


  19. And that’s why I love Applesauce, That’s good information, thanks Pat! I’ll make sure to drop that one at the Rose Bowl tailgate this weekend.

  20. doc: One last thing: Lest you get the notion that I led a monkish existence as a young man, here’s a list of schools where I partied heartily as either a student or a rowdy visitor:

    Marquette University;

    University of Wisconsin;

    University of Illinois;

    Northern Illinois University;

    Southern Illinois University;

    Illinois State University;

    University of Chicago;

    Northwestern University;

    Harvard University;

    Columbia University;

    University of Iowa;

    Purdue University;

    And there’s probably a few I can’t remember. For instance, I vaguely recall getting together with some Georgetown students near their campus in Washington, but it’s all kind of blurry in my mind.

    Oh, and the students at all those institutions took great pride in theirs being ranked as great party schools.

    Ah, to be young and foolish again!

  21. “Ah, to be young and foolish again!”

    You know what they say about youth being wasted on the young!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *